Tag Archives: kufr

Post navigation

As we have clarified in chapter two, the principles. That a Muslim is not pronounced a disbeliever in Allah except if he denies or, rejects something from the religion known by necessity, or makes halaal what Allah made haram, and haram what Allah made halaal. Or that he belittles the Sharī ‘ah, or believes he has a choice in the matter of judging by other than what Allah has revealed.

Also that kufr (disbelief) is of two types: Kufr Akbar: which is major disbelief, or kufr in belief, that takes one out of the fold of Islam. And kufr Asgar: which is minor kufr, or kufr in action, that does not take one out of the fold of Islam.

And that a Muslim is not pronounced a disbeliever by his sayings, actions or belief until the proof is established against him.

And that all the explanations of the verse in Maáidah 44 are understood within the boundaries of all the principles mentioned in chapter two and do not exceed the five sayings discussed in chapter three.

So for the noble reader now, we will bring sayings from the salaaf and scholars after them, that affirm the above information regarding the issue of not judging by what Allah has revealed.

1: Ali Ibn Abi Talha narrates from Ibn Abaas in the tafseer of his (Allah) saying “..And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals then such are the disbelievers “ .That which is the root in this issue he said is “ Whoever denies what Allah reveals then he has disbelieved and whoever accepts it and does not judge by it then he is a dhalim (oppressor), faasiq (sinner).[1]

2-6: Al-Qurtabi said: That Ibn Masood and Al-Hassan said “it is general for all that do not judge by what Allah has revealed, meaning believing in that and making it halaal.” [2]

7: And Mujaahid said regarding these three verses: “Whoever leaves judging by other than what Allah revealed rejecting the book of Allah then he is a kaafir, (disbeliever) dhaalim (oppressor), faasiq (sinner). [4]

8: And Ikraama said: “And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals by denial of it has indeed disbelieved, and whoever accepts it and does not judge by it then he is a dhaalim, faasiq.” [5]

And Al-Khaazinu said in connection: “this is the saying of Ibn Abbaas also.”

9: And what was mentioned above is also the opinion of Az-Zajjaaj. [6]

10: The Sheikhul Mufasireen At-Tabari said: “The foremost of these sayings with me is the saying of those who said: These verses were revealed upon the kuffar from the people of the book. That is because of the information in the verses which come before it and after it, so upon them it was revealed. They are who were meant, by these verses and these verses bring information about them. So the fact that it brings information about them is to be taken foremost……..”[7]

11: And Al-Fakhro Ar-Raazi said: “Ikrama said: “his saying …Whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals ……….. This is regarding the one who rejects with his heart and denies with his tongue. “As for one who knows with his heart, it is the law of Allah and he accepts upon his tongue that it is the law of Allah, but he comes with something which is in opposite to that then such a person is a judge by what Allah has revealed but he is one who has left it. (Taarik lahu) so he does not belong under these verses. And this is the correct saying, and Allah knows best.” [8]

12: Az-Zamakshari said: “And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals…..”despising it …..”Such are the disbelievers, and oppressors, and sinners, a description for them because of their transgression in their disbelief.”[9]

13: And Al-Qurtubi said: meaning, believing in that, making that haalal. As for the one who does that whilst he believes that he is boarding something haraam then he is from the Muslims that sin. His affair is with Allah if He wishes He will punish him, or if He wishes He will forgive him.” [10]

14: And Aboo So`ood said: “meaning, whoever does not judge with that

despisingrejecting…….”then such are the disbelievers “ because of their

15: And Al-Nasafee said “and whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, scornfully…, then such are the disbelievers.” [12]

16: Sheikh Aboo Mansoor said: “it is permitted to mean denial in all the three verses so he would be a disbeliever, oppressor, and a sinner . This is because a complete sinner and a complete oppressor are disbelievers.”[13]

17-25: Aboo Bakr Al-Jassas said: “ and his (Allah) saying ….And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed then such are the disbelievers. “- It is not free from that its meaning is either: kufru-shirk (a disbelief that reaches the level of shirk) and kufr ul johood (denial), or kufr-neama (a disbelief of Allah`s blessings) without denial. So if its meaning is denial of Allah`s laws, or judging by other than it claiming that it is the law of Allah then this is kufr that takes one out the fold of Islam and its doer is an apostate if before that he was a Muslim. Upon this is the explanation, of the one who said: That it was revealed upon the children of Israel and applied upon us, meaning – the one who denied the law of Allah or judged by other than the law of Allah then said “this is the law of Allah “such a person is a disbeliever, just as he children of Israel disbelieved when they done just that. [14] Whilst if the meaning of it was kufru-neama (a disbelief of Allah s blessings) then the disbelief of Allahs blessings, may be because of not showing thanks to Allah for it without a denial, then its doer is not out of the fold of Islam. That which is apparent is the first meaning (disbelief of shirk and deniel) because of his usage of the word kufr upon the one who does not judge by what Allah reveals.” [15]

26: Al-Baydaawi said: “…and whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals….` despising, in rejection of it `…..then such are the disbelievers” because of their despise for it and arrogance to judge by other than it. So that is why he described them by his saying “disbelievers” and “Oppressors” and “sinners.” Their disbelief was because of their rejection of it, and their oppression because of their judging in opposition to it, and their sin because of their transgression from it.” [16]

27: The explainer ofAt-Tahaawi said: “here is an issue which is an obligation to be understood and that is judging by other than what Allah has revealed at times may be disbelief (kufr) that takes one out of the fold of Islam or at times it could be major sin or minor sin and it could be relative disbelief (kufrulmajaazee) or minor disbelief (kufr al-asghar) and that depends on the condition of the leader:

-If he believes that judging by Allahs law is notobligatory or that he can choose or not to choose it or he despises it with awareness that it is the law of Allah then this is major disbelief.

-but if he believes that it is anobligation to judge by what Allah has revealed and he understood it in this situation, then did not judge by it with knowledge that he is deserving of punishment ,then he is a sinner. This is called relative disbelief or minor disbelief.[17]

28: Ibn Al- Jowzi said: “And the final conclusion:

That whoever does not judge by Allah law denying it whilst he knows that Allah revealed it just as the Jews done then such a person is a disbeliever (kaafir).

And whoever does not judge by Allahs law leaning toward desire without denial then he is an oppressor (dhaalim), sinner (faasiq). Ali Ibn Abi Talha narrates from Ibn Abass that he said “whoever denies what Allah has revealed then he has disbelieved and the one who accepts it but does not judge by it then he is an oppressor (dhaalim) sinner (faasiq).” [18]

29: Shiekh ul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “There is no doubt that whoever does notbelieve in the obligation of judging by what Allah has revealed upon his messenger then he is a disbeliever. So whoever deems it permissible to judge between the people by what he sees to be justful without following what Allah has revealed then he is a Disbeliever. For there is no Ummah except that they have to order to judge with justice whilst the justice in its religion may be what their respected people see to be correct. Furthermore many of those who originate themselves to Islam judge by their customs which Allah did not reveal, like the orders of those tribal leaders in the deserts and those obeyed amongst them and they see that, this is what is desirable to judge by, without the book and the sunnah and this is kufr (disbelief).

For indeed many of the people embrace Islam but along with this they do not judge except by their known customs and orders given to them by their leaders so these people if they knew that it was not permissible to judge except by what Allah reveals and they did not adhere to that, rather they madepermissibleto judge in opposition to what Allah reveals so they are the disbelievers, if not then they are ignorant.” [19]

And he also said:

“Mankind, when he makes halaalwhat there is consensus upon that is haraam,

Or makes haraam what there is consensus upon that is halaal, or changesthe legislation which there is consensus upon. He is a disbeliever apostate by consensus of the jurists and upon this similitude was revealed his (Allah) saying upon one of the two sayings: “And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals then such are the disbelievers “meaning he makes halaal the judging by other than what Allah reveals.” [20]

30: The learned Imam Ibnul Qayyim al Jowzi (rahimahullaah) said: “That which is correct is -judging by other than what Allah reveals includes two types of kufr (disbelief): Minor and Major dependent upon the condition of the judge (leader).

So if he believes in the obligation of judging by what Allah revealed in this incident then abandoned it out of disobedience with awareness that he deserves to be punished then this is kufr al asghar (minor disbelief). But if he believes that it is notobligatory or he has a choiceinthe matter with his understanding that it is indeed the law of Allah then this is kufr al akbar (major disbelief). If he is ignorant of it or made a mistake in it, then he is one who made a mistake he has the ruling of those who make mistakes.” [21]

31: And Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaah)said: “…And those that do not judge by what Allah has revealed then such are the disbelievers “because they denied the law of Allah intentionally, in opposition and deliberately. He said right here “…then such are the oppressors “because they did not treat without discrimination the oppressed from the oppressor in the matter where Allah ordered with justice and equality between all. So they differed and oppressed and transgressed. “ [22]

32: The learned one of Shaam Ash-Sheikh Jammal ul Kaasimi (rahimahullaah) said: “disbelief of a leader that does not judge by what Allah has revealed with restricting despise and denialto it, this is the direction which many had taken and were more impressed by, from Ikrimah and Ibn Abbaas.” [23]

33: And As- Saahib ul Manaar [24] (rahimahullaah) said: “and many of the Muslims have introduced legislations, and rulings like those before them had introduced, and they abandoned- with judging by it – some of what Allah had revealed upon them. As for those who abandon what Allah had revealed in his book from the rulings without false interpretation and they believe in its authenticity. Then it is truly upon them, what Allah said in the three verses or in some of them. They are all accounted for, based upon their condition:

– So whoever turns away from the ruling of punishment for theft or false accusation of fornication, or fornication, not submitting to it because of his dislike of it, and preference of other than it from the legislation of man then he is a clearkaafir (disbeliever).

– And whoever does not judge by it due to otherfaults then he is a dhaalim (oppressor) if in that was the neglecting of rights, or abandonment of justice and equality in it, if not then he is a faasiq (sinner) only.

Indeed we see many of the religious Muslims believing, that the civil magistrate courts which judge with the kuffaar laws, as being disbelievers (kuffar) taking the apparent meaning of the verse “And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals then such are the disbelievers.” and they necessitate by their ronouncing of takfeer on the judge – the one who rules by the laws of the kuffar– the takfeer of the leaders, and those in authority who implement the laws of the kuffar.

For, if it was not written with their knowledge, then surely it was placed with their permission, and they are the ones who appoint the judges to rule by it. As for the apparent meaning of the verse then no one from the well known scholars of fiqh has ever said it to mean that, rather no one had ever said that at all. !!! [25]

34: And the Sheikh Aboo Hibbatu Allah Ismaael bin Ibraheem Al-Isaredee may Allah have mercy upon him said:

“And whoever does notbelieve in the obligation of judging by what Allah has revealed upon his messenger, and made permissible to judge between the people by that which he sees to be justice, without adhering to what Allah has revealed then he is a disbeliever.……so these people if they knew that it was not permissible to judge except by that which Allah had revealed and then did not adhere to that, rather they made it permissible to rule in opposition to what Allah has revealed then they are disbelievers, otherwise they are ignorant, astray, and they do not know.” [26]

35: His excellence the Sheikh Ash-Shanqitee – may Allah have mercy upon him said:

“So know that the liberating stance in this study is that kufar, dhulm, and fisq (disbelief, oppression, and sin) each one of them is expressed in the shariah to sometimes give a meaning of sin, and sometimes give a meaning of kufr that takes one outside the fold of Islam.

– So whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed in opposition to the messenger and invalidating the rules of Allah then his oppression, sin, and disbelief all of them takes him out of the fold of Islam.

– And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed believing that he has boarded that which is harram (impermissible) and is ugly. His disbelief, oppression, and sin are not of that which takes him out of the fold of Islam.”[27]

36: His excellence the Sheikh As-Sa’dee may Allah have mercy upon him said:

“Judging by other than what Allah has revealed is from the actions of the people of disbelief. It maybe the disbelief that takes one out the fold of Islam, and that is if he believes in its permissibility and its allowance. And sometimes it maybe a major sin , and from the actions of disbelief that the doer may deserves a fierce punishment`…….And whoever does not judge by what Allah reveals then such are the disbelievers… ` Ibn Abbaas said: kufr doona kufr (a disbelief less than the disbelief that takes one out of the fold of Islam), and dhulm doona dhulm (an oppression less than that which takes one out of the fold of Islam), and fisq doona fisq (sin less than that which takes one out of the fold of Islam). So it is a major oppression when it is made permissible, and a great major sin when it is donewithout it being made permissible.” [28]

37 : The Mujadid of the religion, the Imaam of the Ahla- Sunna wa al jamat Abdul Aziz bin Abdallah bin Baaz may Allah increase his days with us and benefit us by his knowledge, and give him the best of rewards in all his efforts for Islam and the Muslims. He said:

“whoever judges by other than what Allah has revealed then he does not go out of four positions:

1) One who says that I judge by this because it is better than the Islamic Sharī ‘ahthen he is a disbeliever kufar al Akbar .

2) One who says that I judge by this because it is like the Islamic Shari’ahand judging by this is permissible just as judging by the Shariah is permissible. He is a disbeliever kufar al Akbar.

3) One who says that I judge by this and the ruling of the Islamic Shari’ah is better, but the judging by other than what Allah has revealed is allowed. He is a disbeliever kufr al Akbar.

4) One who says that I judge by this whilst he believes that judgment by other than what Allah has revealed is not allowed and he says: that the judgment of the Islamic Shariah is better, and it is notpermissible to judge by other than it, but he is easy in the matter, or he does this because of an order issued from his government. He is a disbeliever with kufr al asghar minor disbelief that does not take him out of the fold of Islam and it is considered to be from the greatest of major sins.” [29]

38: This saying has also come from the Muhadith of our time, the faqeh, the Imaam, the mujadid of Islam, the learned Sheikh Naasirud-deen Al-Albaanee, may Allah protect him, make him a source of benefit, and may Allah reward him with the best reward for his efforts with Islam and the Muslims.[30]

The opinion of the Sheikh was clearly published in the newspapers: `As-Sharq ul Awsaat` and Al Muslimoon. The Noble sheikh Ibn Baaz commented on the opinion of Sheikh Al-Albanee and affirmed it in the above mentioned newspapers by his saying:

I have seen the beneficial reply which his eminence the Sheikh Naasirud-Deen Al Albanee had produced which was publicized in the newspapers: `As Sharq ul Awsaat` and Al Muslimoon. Which his eminence replied as an answer for the Questioner regarding Takfeer of the one `who does not judge by what Allah has revealed without explanation. I call it a valuable speech for indeed he spoke the truth, followed and clarified the path of the believers may Allah grant him ability. He made clear that it is not permissible for anyone to judge someone who judges by other than Allah law based just upon his action without finding out did he make it halal by his heart, and he brought of evidence for that, what was narrated by Ibn Abaas (radiyallaahu anhu) and other than him from the salaf of this Ummah…`

39: Then the speech of the two scholars [32] was read to the Imaam, the Sheikh Ibn Uthaimeen who approved of it and strengthened it.

So all these are the sayings of the scholars of old and present. We findno difference between the early scholars and our contemporary scholars, in this dangerous issue of Takfeer. Nothing remains after the truth except falsehood

[1] Narrated by Ibn Jareer in his tafseeer 19/357 No.12063 & in Ibn al Mundir &Ibn Abi Hatim. Also see Dur al Manthoor 3/87, and the Saheefa of Ali Ibn Abi Talha from Ibn Abaas 179. Imaam Ahmad said regarding this Saheefa ` in Egypt there is a Saheefa of Tafseer narrated by Ali Ibn Abi Talha, if a man travels to Egypt with an intention to see it, that would be sufficient for him.` Buccari use to rely on this Saheefa extensively for his collection of Authentic Ahadeeth in that which he narrated from Ibn Abaas. The truth is, that it is of the most authentic chains in the tafseer of Ibn Abaas, although Ibn Abi Talha did not hear them directly from Ibn Abaas. They were known by the middle narrators whom Ibn Abi Talha took them from. For indeed he did take them from Mujaahid and Ikrama so there is no defect in that. And Allah knows best.

[14] (on this point it is imperative that we add the names of those who are of this saying which we found to be many, from them are Al – Barra,Hudaayfa, Dhahaak, Qataada, AbooSaalih, AbooMajliz, AbaidullahbinAbdullah bin UtbaabinMasood, AbooYa`la Al-Faraai, so all these said that these verses are specific for the people of the book. These eight names will now be added to the list making so far a total of twenty five sayings of the scholars).

Consensus of ahlus-sunnah wal jamaa’ah upon the tafseer of the verse; “..And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed such are the disbelievers (kaafiroon).” [Al-Maa`idah (5):44]

So that in which there is no difference between the former and the latter scholars regarding one who does not judge by what Allaah has revealed out of denial or making it permissible is that such an individual is a kaafir (disbeliever), out of the fold of Islam.

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers.”

[Al-Maa`idah (5):44]

Then the scholars of tafaseer did not differ in the detailed explanation of it, except in their usage of words, so the one who has little knowledge will think that they are differing in meaning but that is not the case some of them explain by means of synonymous terms while others are straight forward in their explanation but they all mean and believe the same, which is the belief of Ahla Sunnah wal Jamaat.

So if we gather all the statements of the Mufassireen from Ahla sunnah then, their tafaseer of this verse do not exceed five sayings. They are:

First Saying:

He who denies what Allaah has revealed has disbelieved and he who accepts it but does not judge by it then he is a dhaalim,faasiq.

This is narrated by Alee Ibn Abee Talhah, from Ibn Abbaas (radiyallaahu anhu) and similar to this is narrated by Ikrimah.[1]

Second Saying:

That the intended meaning of this verse is kufr doona kufr (disbelief less than disbelief) which does not takes one out of the fold of Islam.

From those who said this are Ibnu Abbass (radiyallaahu anhu), Taawoos and his son (rahimahumallaah), and Ataa Bin Abee Rabaaha (rahimahullaah), and Ali Bin Al-Hussain Zainul-Aabideen (rahimahullaah). [2]

And these first two sayings, there are no problems with at all. Both of them in reality give one meaning at the end, and that is our saying: after establishment and explanation.

Third Saying:

That Allaah meant by this verse the Jews who changed the book of Allaah and its rules.

There are over nine evidences for this. From those who said this are: Al-Baraa, Hudhayfah, Ikrimah, Dahhaak, Qataadah, Abu Saalih, Abu Mijliz, Ubaydullaah Bin Abdullaah Bin Utbaa Bin Mas’ood and most of the Mufassireen as stated by Al-Qurtubi.[3]

Also to aid this statement is the reason for the revelation of this verse, as it occurs in Saheeh Muslim. From the hadeeth of Al-Baraa Bin Aazib (radiyallaahu anhu) who said:

“Two Jews who were tied and their faces blackened with ashes passed by the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). So he called them and said: ‘Is this how you find the punishment for zina in your book?’ They replied: ‘Yes’. So he called a man from amongst their scholars and said: ‘Do you swear by Allaah, the One who revealed the Tawrah to Moosaa, that this is how you find the punishment for adultery in your book?’ He said: ‘No, and if you hadn’t asked me to swear to it then I would not have informed you. The real punishment is stoning, but it is prevalent amongst our noble ones so if we found our noble ones fornicating we left him and if we found the peasant fornicating we established the punishment on him. So we said: ‘Come here.’ So we went to gather the noble people and the average people, and we brought the people who were tied and their faces were blackened to the place of stoning.’ Allaah’s messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: ‘Oh Allaah, I am the first to revive your law after it has passed away.’ So he ordered that they be stoned. Then Allaah revealed:

“O Messenger (Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam))! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you, of such who say: ‘We believe’ with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. And of the Jews are men who listen much and eagerly to lies – listen to others who have not come to you. They change the words from their places; they say, ‘If you are given this, take it, but if you are not given this, then beware!’…”

“..And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed such are the disobedient (faasiqoon).”

[Al-Maa`idah (5):47]”

All three verses for them, the kuffar. [Saheeh Muslim]

As further evidence, Abu Ya’laa Al-Faraa said:

“And He (subhaanahu wa ta’aala) also made that clear when He mentioned the Jews and said:

فَإِن جَآؤُوكَ فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُم أَوْ

“If they come to you then judge between them or..” [Al-Maa’idah (5):42]

But He did not stop there, rather He (subhaanahu wa ta’aala) said:

وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ

“And we ordained for them a life for a life….” [Al-Maa’idah (5):45]

So when the entire story, from the beginning to the end is about the Jews, then the ayaat are about them.”[4]

Remember here also the principle that evidence is taken from the generalisation of the words not from the specific reason for revelation.[5]

The kufr in these verses refer to everyone that does what the Jews done in their denial of some of the rulings of the shari’ah that are well established, and that is what was intended by those who made it specific to the Jews, who changed the book of Allaah.

This was also confirmed by Al-Jassas when he said:

“The reference is to rejecting Allaah’s judgement, or judging with other than that, while being informed of what Allaah’s judgement is. This is the kufr that removes one from the religion, its doer is an apostate, even if he was a Muslim before that. In this way it has been explained by those who said: ‘It was revealed for the children of Israel and it applies to us.’ They mean that whoever rejects Allaah’s judgements, or judges by other than Allaah’s judgements, then he claims: ‘This is Allaah’s judgement, then this person is a disbeliever, just as the children of Israel disbelieved when they did that.” [6]

And Al-Khaazin said:

“..And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed such are the disbelievers (kaafiroon).”[Al-Maa`idah (5):44]

“Meaning that when the Jews rejected the judgement of Allaah (subhaanahu wa ta’aala) which they had texts for in the Tawrah they said: “That it was not an obligation, so they were complete disbelievers in Moosaa (alayhis-salaam) the Tawrah, and Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and the Qur’aan.” [7]

“And the most correct of these sayings, according to me, is that which says that these ayaat were revealed about the disbelievers from the people of the Book. Since the ayaat before and after them were revealed about them, then their meanings are understood by them, and these (earlier and latter) ayaat give information about them, so their information about them is most weighty. Then if one was to say that Allaah mentioned it in a mode that is general for all who do not judge by what Allaah revealed, so how can you make it specific? Then the answer is, that Allaah was general in His address about people who reject the ruling that Allaah decreed in His Book. He informed about them – that by their avoiding to judge in the way that they had, they were disbelievers. So in this way, it is said about all who do not judge by what Allaah revealed out of rejection to it, that he is a disbeliever in Allaah, as Ibn Abbaas said. Because by their rejection of Allaah’s judgement after having knowledge that it was revealed in His Book, then they have rejected the Prophethood of His Prophet after they knew that he was a prophet.” [8]

So this is the meaning of the saying of Al-Hasan:

“It was revealed upon the Jews and it applies to us.”

And the saying of Ibraheem An-Nakha’ee:

“It was revealed upon the children of Israel and it applies this Ummah.” [9]

So this is the opinion of the Shaykh of the Mufassireen Ibn Jareer and Al-Qaadi Bin Ishaaq, and Aboo Su’ood, and Al-Jassaas and many others. They all agree perfectly with what was said by Hudhayfah (radiyallaahu anhu) which was reported from him by Hamaam who said:

“We were with Hudhayfah (radiyallaahu anhu) so we mentioned: “..And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed such are the disbelievers (kaafiroon).” [Al-Maa`idah (5):44].

A man from amongst the people said “Indeed this was revealed upon the children of Israel!

Then Hudhayfah (radiyallaahu anhu) said: `Yes, your brothers among the children of Israel. You think that it gives a free licence in your case, and punishment in theirs! Rather, by the one in whose Hand is my soul, as long as the practise is the same as the practice then the threat is the same as the threat.” [10]

And this is the opinion of Abu Mijliz and many others. Aboo Mijliz was a major ta`bi`een, a great scholar:

“A group from the Ibaadiyyah came to sit with him, they said: ‘Allaah (subhaanahu wa ta’aala) says: “..And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed such are the disbelievers (kaafiroon).” [Al-Maa`idah (5):44]…“..such are the Oppressors (dhaalimoon).”[Al-Maa`idah (5):45].. “..such are the disobedient (faasiqoon).” [Al-Maa`idah (5):47]..’

Aboo Mijliz said: ‘They (the rulers) are aware of what they do and they know that it is sinful. – in another narration – ‘if they left any matter of it, then they know that they have sinned – and this verse was revealed upon the Jews and the Christians.`

They said: `By Allaah you truly know what we know, but you fear them.

He said: `You have more cause to be afraid then us, as for us, we do not know what you know!` They said: `you do know but that which prevents you from performing your duty is your fear of them.[11]

So Aboo Mijliz (rahimahullaah) was saying that the leaders know what they know regarding judging by other than what Allaah has revealed, and they know that it is major sin and that they are deserving a dreadful punishment. But their desires and lusts carried them along. So the verse does not include them in it. Because it was revealed upon those who judge by other than what Allaah has revealed out of denial and making it permissible as the Jews and Christians and whoever treads their path. So those are the ones that leave the fold of Islam, because of their denial, and making halal, not the leaders.

But those Ibaadiyyah, and they are a sect from the HurooreeKhawarijj were not content with that and did not agree. Rather they transgressed the boundaries of manners and continued upon what they are upon today saying: `And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed then he is a disbeliever’ without any explanation.”

This is indeed the opinion of many people today! Oh Allaah I flee to you from ever going astray and speaking without knowledge.

Fourth and fifth saying to follow in next weeks class, in shaa’ Allaah.

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers.”

[Al-Maa`idah (5):44]

That Allaah meant by this verse all of mankind, the Muslims and the disbelievers.

From those who say that are Ibn Mas’ood, Al-Hasan, and Ibraheem An-Nakha’ee and As-Suddi.[12]

The word: مَن“..(man) whoever..” (in the above verse) cannot be restricted to a particular people like leaders, or politicians, or Jews or Christians, it shows clearly that it applies to all people.

Aj-Jassas said about this verse:

“Ibn Mas’ood and Al-Hasan said about this verse: “And it is general” meaning for whoever does not judge by what Allaah reveals, and judges by other than it out of choice knowing that it is the law of Allaah. So whoever does this has disbelieved.”[13]

Al-Qurtubee (rahimahullaah) said about this verse:

Ibn Mas’ood and Al-Hasan said: “It is general for anyone who does not judge by what Allaah reveals from the Muslims, and the Jews and the disbelievers.” meaning believing in that and making it permissible.[14]

And Aboo Hayyaan said:

“And As-Su’oodee said: “Whoever opposes the law of Allaah and abandoned it deliberately and went beyond it with knowledge, then he is truly from the disbelievers.” This is because of the denial so it is kufr the opposite of Eemaan.[15]

He also said:

“And that it is general for the Jews and other than them is the opinion of Ibn Mas’ood, and Ibraheem, and Aathaai and many others. But it is Kufr–doona–Kufr (a disbelief less than disbelief which takes you out the fold of Islam) and Dhulm-doona-Dhulm (an oppression less than the oppression which takes one out the fold of Islam) and Fisq-doona-Fisq (a sin which does not take you out the fold of Islam) meaning the kufr (disbelief) of a Muslim is not like that of a kaafir (disbeliever). Similarly his dhulm and fisq does not take him out the fold of Islam.”[16]

And Ibn Aatheea said:

“And a great number of people of knowledge said: The verse incorporates everyone that does not judge by what Allaah reveals, but for the leaders of this Ummah it is Kufr-al-Maasia (major sin only) it does not take them out of Imaan.”[17]

So it is imperative to know here that it was the Mufassiroon that placed the above restriction of the verse, regarding the leaders. Whilst at the same time they were the ones who made the verse general to everyone else. This means that for the leader it can only be kufr al Ashgar (minor kufr), and as for everyone else then it could at times be kufr al Ashgar or at times be kufr al akbar.

Fifth Saying:

That Allaah meant by the first verse of Soorah Al-Maa’idah (verse 44): the Muslims, where He said at the end that “…such are the disbelievers (kaafiroon).”The Jews by the second verse (verse 45) where He said “….such are the oppressors “(dhalimoon).” The Christians by the following two verses (verse 46-47) where He said: “…such are the sinners “(fasiqoon).”

Abu Hayaan said: “And it is as if He specified every general statement by the verse which came after it.

When before the first statement: “… such are the disbelievers (kafiroon)” He said “so if they come to you then judge between them or…” “..And if you judge then judge..”… (to His final saying)….”…and whosoever does not judge by what Allaah reveals such are the disbelievers (kafiroon)”

And before the second statement “……such are the oppressors (dhalimoon)”He said “ …and we ordained therein for them a life for a life..” (to his final saying) ”..and whosoever does not judge by what Allaah reveals such are the oppressors (dhalimoon).”

And before the third statement “..such are the sinners (fasiqoon).”

He said: “..and in their footsteps we sent Jesus son of Mary confirming the Tawrah that had come before him..” (to His saying) “..and whosoever does not judge by what Allaah reveals such are the sinners (fasiqoon).”[20]

This statement is understood just as the previous one that the kufr of the Muslims is kufr maasia (major sin) or kufr-doona- kufr (a kufr that does not take one out of the fold of Islam) otherwise the apparent state of the Muslims would be more evil than the people of the Book. This is how the people of knowledge explained it.

Al-Aloosi said:

“Ibn Hameed and others narrate from As-Sha`bi that he said: “the three verses that are in Al-Maa’idah: The first one is for this Ummah. The second is for the Jews. The third is for the Christians.”

This dictates that the believers are in an evil condition, worse than the Jews and the Christians. Except that if it was said: “that kufr if it is directed to the believers then it is carried as harshness, and a disbeliever if he is described with fisq (sin) and dhulm (oppression) then it shows his arrogance and his disobedience in it.[21]

THE CONCLUSION OF THE FIVE SAYINGS AND CONCENSUS UPON ITS MEANING:

There is no real difference in the reality of its meaning or its explanation. Rather all of them come out from one niche. If there begins differences in the apparent usage of words then it is permissible differing (ikhtilaaf-at-tanowwaa), not the impermissible differing (ikhtilaaf-u-tadaad), and we praise Allaah for this.

As for the apparent meaning of the verse then no one from the well known people of knowledge explained it to mean what it apparently says. Rather no one at all had ever done so.[22]

The Consensus:

It has been narrated that: A man from the khawaarij entered upon Al-Mamoon. So Mamoon said to him: “What caused you to differ with us?” He said: “A verse in the book of Allaah.” Then Mamoon asked: “Which one?” The man replied: “Whoever does not judge by what Allaah reveals then such are the disbelievers.” So Mamoon said to him: “Do you have evidence that it was revealed?” He replied: “Yes.” So he said: “Then what is your evidence?” He replied: “Consensus of the Ummah.” So he said: “then as you accepted their consensus that it was revealed, then accept their consensus in the explanation.” He replied: “You spoke the truth. Assalaamu alaikum O Ameerul-Mumineen.” [23]

Summary Of The Five Sayings Of All The Mufassireen

1. He who denies what Allaah has revealed has disbelieved and he who accepts it but does not judge by it then he is a dhaalim,faasiq.

2. That the intended meaning of this verse is kufr doona kufr disbelief less than disbelief which does not takes you out the fold of Islam.

3. That Allaah meant by this verse the Jews who changed the book of Allaah and its rules.

4. That Allaah meant by this verse all of mankind, the Muslims and the disbelievers.

5. That Allaah meant by the first verse of Soorah Al-Maa’idah (verse 44) the Muslims, where He said at the end that “…such are the disbelievers (kafiroon).”The Jews by the second verse (verse 45) where He said “….such are the oppressors (dhalimoon).”The Christians by the following two verses (verse 46-47) where He said “…such are the sinners (fasiqoon).”

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers.”[Al-Maa`idah (5):44]

Then none of his findings will go out of the above five saying.

In conclusion it can clearly be seen that a leader who does not judge by what Allaah has revealed does not leave the fold of Islam unless he falls under point 1 (first saying) only. As for point 4 (fourth saying) though it is general according to some mufassireen so incorporates leaders as well, it is restricted to a kufar–masiayah for the leaders which does not take them out the fold of Islam.

If we understand Eemaan and what it constitutes well and comprehended its meaning deeply we will now be able to see clearly what its opposite Kufr is, and what nullifies Eemaan. What negates the sayings and actions of the heart, the sayings and actions of the tongue, and the actions of the limbs? This can be understood by breaking Kufr (disbelief) down into the following categories:
Kufr of ignorance and rejection
Kufr of denial and hiding or opposing Kufr of arrogance and pride
Kufr of hypocrisy

EVIDENCE FOR PRINCIPLE TEN

Any one of these can take a Muslim outside the fold of Islam completely. So as we mentioned the definition of Eemaan was; sayings and actions of the heart, sayings and actions of the tongue and actions of the bodily limbs. The above categories dictate that it is possible for all of this definition to be negated or some of it, depending on the circumstances of the belief and kufr. For example: Sayings, Actions, And Belief Negated:

If all the constitutes of Eemaan are negated, then all the above categories of kufr are present except hypocrisy.

Sayings Of The Heart Negated:

If affirmation of the heart is negated without the presence of knowledge of the truth then it is Kufr of Ignorance and denial. This is similar to the kufr of the mushrikoon Arab as Allaah states regarding them:

“Nay, they deny that; the knowledge whereof they could not compass and whereof the interpretation has not yet come unto them. Thus those before them did deny. Then see what was the end of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.)!” [Yoonus (10):39]

Hiding The Truth Whilst Having Knowledge Of It:

If one was to hide the truth (this includes not acting upon it) whilst acknowledging its truthfulness then this is the Kufr of rejection and hiding or denial and that is like the kufr of Fir’awn and his people as Allaah said:

وَجَحَدُوا بِهَا وَاسْتَيْقَنَتْهَا أَنفُسُهُمْ ظُلْمًا وَعُلُوًّا

فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُفْسِدِينَ

“And they belied them (those Ayât) wrongfully and arrogantly, though their ownselves were convinced thereof [i.e. those (Ayaat) are from Allaah, and Moosaa is the Messenger of Allaah in truth, but they disliked to obey Moosaa, and hated to believe in his Message of Monotheism]. So see what was the end of the Mufsidûn(disbelievers, disobedient to Allaah, evil-doers, liars.).”

[An-Naml (27):14]

Actions Of The Heart Negated:

If the actions of the heart like intention, sincerity, love, were to be negated with the presence of outwardly manifested actions of the limbs then this is kufr of hypocrisy. This would be the case even if complete attestation to the truth was present or negated whether the negation was by denial or doubt. This kufr is the type of kufr of Ibn Salool and his sect. Allaah, The Most High said:

“And of mankind, there are some (hypocrites) who say: “We believe in Allaah and the Last Day” while in fact they believe not.”Al-Baqarah (2):8]

Actions Of The Heart And Bodily Limbs Negated:

If actions of the heart and bodily limbs are negated, with awareness (knowledge) in the heart, and acknowledgment on the tongue, then this is kufr on denial and arrogance. It is the kufr of Iblees, and most of the Jews those who witnessed the messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) was the true messenger but did not follow him like Ka’ab bin al-Ashraf and it is like the one who abandons the prayer out of denial and arrogance.

Actions Of The Bodily Limbs Are Negated With The Presence Of Actions Of The Heart:

The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said about this one:

“Verily in the heart there is a piece of flesh, if it is pure the whole body is pure if it is corrupt the whole body is corrupt, is it not the heart.” [Agreed Upon]

This is to believe that Eemaan consists of belief, sayings and actions. It is broken down into the following detail; sayings and actions of the heart, sayings and actions of the tongue, and actions of the outwardly manifested limbs.

The Linguistically Meaning Of Eemaan Is Tasdeeq

Tasdeeq or ‘trust’ or ‘belief’ as the brothers of Yusuf (alayhis-salaam) said:

“The believers are only those who, when Allaah is mentioned, feel a fear in their hearts and when His Verses (this Qur’aan) are recited unto them, they (i.e. the Verses) increase their Faith; and they put their trust in their Lord (Alone).”
[Al-Anfaal (8):2]

Sayings of the tongue

This is in pronouncing the shahadah and attesting to all it necessitates. As Allaah said:

“Verily, those who say: ‘Our Lord is (only) Allaah,’ and thereafter Istaqaamoo(i.e. stood firm and straight on the Islamic Faith of Monotheism by abstaining from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which Allaah has forbidden and by performing all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained), on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

[Al-Ahqaaf (46):13]

Actions of the tongue and body limbs

These are actions of the tongue which cannot be performed except by using the tongue alone like recitation of the Qur’aan, adhkaar (remembrances) and actions of the body limbs are those which cannot be performed except by using the body limbs alone like standing in prayer, rukoo, sajood as Allaah states:

“Verily, those who recite the Book of Allaah (this Qur’aan), and perform As-­Salaat, and spend (in charity) out of what We have provided for them, secretly and openly, hope for a (sure) trade­gain that will never perish.”[Faatir (35):29]

So the heart has sayings and an action, the tongue has sayings and actions, and the body limbs have actions all of which compromise Eemaan.

The differences amongst the people in what constitutes Eemaan.

Ibn Abi Izza (rahimahullaah) who explained Aqeedah at Tahaaweeyah said the people have differed in what they believed constitutes Eemaan to be. So Maalik, Shafi’ee, Ahmed, Awzaa’ee, Ishaaq bin Rahweeyah and all the rest of the people of hadīth and people of Madīnah (may Allaah have mercy on them all) went to the opinion that Eemaan constituted of belief in the heart, attesting that with the tongue and action of the body limbs. [Aqeedah Tahaaweeyah p373 – 374]

Some scholars went to the opinion that ‘attesting to it with the tongue’ is an extra pillar of Eemaan. From them was Abu Mansoor al Maatureedi and he narrates from Abu Haneefah.

The Karaamiyah[1] went to the opinion that Eemaan was ‘attesting with the tongue only’. This necessitates that the hypocrite is a believer with complete Eemaan.

Jaham ibn Safwan and the Qadariyah went to the opinion that Eemaan was ‘awareness (knowledge) in the heart only’ and this opinion is far more corrupt than that of the Karaamiyah. This opinion necessitates that Fir’aun and his people were believers because they knew the truthfulness of Musa and Haroon yet they did not believe in them. Allaah said about them:

“He [Moosaa] said: “Verily, you know that these signs have been sent down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as clear (evidences i.e. proofs of Allâh’s Oneness and His Omnipotence, etc.). And I think you are, indeed, O Fir’aun (Pharaoh) doomed to destruction (away from all good)!” [Al-Israa’ (17):102]

“And they belied them (those Ayât) wrongfully and arrogantly, though their ownselves were convinced thereof [i.e. those (Ayât) are from Allaah, and Mûsa is the Messenger of Allaah in truth, but they disliked to obey Moosaa, and hated to believe in his Message of Monotheism]. So see what was the end of the Mufsidûn(disbelievers, disobedient to Allaah, evil-doers, liars).”

[An-Naml (27):14]

Also, the people of the book knew the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) as they knew their own children yet they still did not believe.

Further, Abu Taalib would be a believer accordingly because he knew the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) very well.

Even worse Iblees himself would be a believer with complete Eemaan according to Jahm bin Safwaan, for he was not ignorant about his lord either. Allaah confirms this from his saying:

قَالَ رَبِّ فَأَنظِرْنِي إِلَى يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ

“He [Iblees (Satan)] said: “O my Lord! Give me then respite till the Day they (the dead) will be resurrected.”

“He [Iblees (Satan)] said: “O my Lord! Because you misled me, I shall indeed adorn the path of error for them (mankind) on the earth, and I shall mislead them all.”

[Al-Hijr (15):39]

So Eemaan with Jaham bin Safwan is knowledge of the lord of the worlds, and Kufr would be simply ignorance of him. Upon this belief there is not a complete disbeliever in this earth, because no one is ignorant to the Creator of the worlds.

Ibn Raawandi and those who followed him from the Mutazalite and other than them said that ‘Eemaan was only belief’, with this definition all the jews would be believers as they believed in the message of Mohammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) but they arrogantly rejected it so Allaah negated Eemaan from them.

The Murjiyah[2] and the Karaamiyah[3] say: ‘Eemaan is attesting with the tongue without belief in the heart.’ Upon this the hypocrites are believers, and Allaah said about them: “And never (O Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam)) pray (funeral prayer) for any of them (hypocrites) who dies, nor stand at his grave. Certainly they disbelieved in Allaah and His Messenger, and died while they were Fâsiqûn (rebellious, – disobedient to Allaah and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam)).” [At-Taubah (9):84]

Others of the Murjiyah said Eemaan is ‘belief in the heart and attesting with the tongue’ but they negate actions of the bodily limbs here, they remove the hadith of Jibraeel which explains the pillars of Islam.[4]

The Khawaarij and many others who followed them said Eemaan was ‘obedience to Allaah in the obligations and voluntary deeds’.[5]

This principle dictates that the mother of all verses used to pronounce ‘takfeer’ is surah al Ma’idah verse 44. It must be understood that this verse is general and not to be applied specifically on some people and not on others.

EVIDENCE FOR PRINCIPLE EIGHT

Our beloved Shaykh, Shaykh Alee Hasan, gave a very clear explanation of this from the verse of SurahAl-Maa’idah. He said: “..where Allaah said: “waman..” which means “and whoever..” this shows it is general for anybody without any exception…” [1]

He also mentioned that where Allaah said: “..bi maa..” which means “..with whatever..” this shows that it is referring to any issue of legislation not just politics, or legislated punishments or jihaad. So it is as the principle states: “the evidence is in the generality of the wording not in the specific reason of its revelation.” [2]

The saying of Al-Qurtubee (rahimahullaah):

“And Ibn Masood, and Al-Hassan said: “It is general for everyone that does not judge by what Allaah has revealed. Meaning, believing in that, and making that halaal.”

This dictates that an individual can have a belief which is major kufr, or say something that is major kufr, or do an act of major kufr, which could make him a kaafir, a disbeliever [after the establishment of the proof against him].

Major Kufr in belief – Like believing that Allaah has a partner, or believing that Allaah has defects with His Names or Attributes, or believing that the Companions had defects in their religion or believing fornication and wine are Moobaaha (permissible).

Major Kufr in saying – Like reviling Allaah, or his messenger, or the angels, or the religion of Islaam. This also includes making fun of Allaah or His Verses or His messenger. All these sayings are major kufr no matter how it was: with seriousness or out of laughter, making it permissible or not making it permissible. These actions take one outside the fold of Islaam after the establishment of the hujjah (proof).

Major Kufr in action – Like prostration to a statue, a grave, the sun or moon and throwing the Qur’aan into rubbish. This again only after the establishment of the Hujjah.

And there are other acts of major kufr in belief, action, and sayings but something which is imperative for one to understand here in this principle is that “Not judging by what Allaah has revealed” is not included in these acts of major kufr, which do not need one to make permissible before acknowledging that this is major kufr. However, takfeer cannot be applied on major kufr until the proof is established first.

The reason for this is because all the acts of kufr mentioned above fall under kufr al akbar (major kufr) and are connected to action of the heart however “not judging by what Allaah has revealed” cannot be understood to be kufr al akbar connected to the heart, until the proof is established against him first.

“If you ask them (about this), they declare: “We were only talking idly and joking.” Say: “Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?” “Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed…”

“Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allaah, then Allaah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zaalimoon (polytheists and wrong­doers) there are no helpers.”

“Whoever disbelieved in Allaah after his belief, except him who is forced thereto and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from Allaah, and theirs will be a great torment.”

[An-Nahl (16):106]

So all actions of kufr in belief, sayings and actions that reach the level of kufr al akbar, are actions that take one out of the fold of Islam, after the establishment of the proof against the individual. With an exception to the one who is being forced whilst his heart is full of Imaan as in Soorah an-Nahl.

We judge the rulers only by that which is apparent, and leave that which is not apparent to Allaah for indeed He alone knows the inner most affairs of all people.

This principle dictates that we cannot venture into the leaders hearts, and speak of those things which we have no apparent evidence for, so we would indeed be sinning if we spoke of his actions which pertain to his heart, i.e love, hope, fear, etc. we can only speak of the apparent effects of this.[1]

EVIDENCE FOR PRINCIPLE SIX

Imaam At-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah) states in his famous book of Aqeedatut-Tahaawiyyah:

“And we do not testify against them with kufr nor with shirk nor hypocrisy just so long as these are not apparent from them and we leave their unapparent affairs to Allaah.”[2]

So in explanation of this Ibn Abi Izza said:

“This is because we have been ordered to judge that which is apparent and we have been prohibited from suspicion, and following that which we have no knowledge of, as Allaah said:

“And follow not (O man i.e., say not, or do not or witness not, etc.) that of which you have no knowledge (e.g. one’s saying: “I have seen,” while in fact he has not seen, or “I have heard,” while he has not heard). Verily! The hearing, and the sight, and the heart, of each of those you will be questioned (by Allaah).” [Al-Israa’ (17):36]

Imaam At-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah) also said:

“And we do not pronounce takfeer upon anyone from the people of Qibla by these sins, as long as they do not make them halaal, and we do not say that one who sins his imaan is not harmed.”[3]

(This is also a refutation of the Murjia whom we are accused of being)

What is meant by “people of Qibla” in his above saying is: We name our people of the Qibla Muslims, Mu’mins [as long as they hold up to what the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) came with knowingly, and that they believe in everything he said, and informed of]. The shaykh (rahimahullaah) is pointing out by this statement a refutation to the Khawaarij who pronounce takfeer on the one who does sin.[4]

[1] Every action does not necessarily dictate the action of the heart. i.e. a father smacking his child (an action of the limbs) does not mean he hates ( an action of the heart) his child.

That a Muslim is not pronounced a disbeliever (kaafir) by what he says or does or believes until the evidence is established against him(1), and his doubts disappear and all the conditions of takfeer apply and all the conditions that negate takfeer are negated.

So this principle dictates that we submit to the withholding of pronouncing takfeer upon the one who rejects, denies, or opposes something from the religion that is known by necessity up until the proof is established against him.

EVIDENCE FOR PRINCIPLE FIVE

The evidences for this principle are too many to mention however of the evidences that prove this sixth principle is the saying of Allaah:

وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّى نَبْعَثَ رَسُولاً “And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning).”
[Al-Isra (17):15]

قُلِ اللّهِ شَهِيدٌ بِيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ وَأُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ لأُنذِرَكُم بِهِ وَمَن بَلَغَ “Say (O Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam): “What thing is the most great in witness?” Say: “Allaah (the Most Great!) is Witness between me and you; this Qur’aan has been revealed to me that I may therewith warn you and whomsoever it may reach.”
[Al-An’aam (6):19]

Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said:

“Also the women who had continual bleeding and said: “I have continual heavy bleeding which prevents me from prayer and fasting.” So he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) ordered her to pray during the period of continual bleeding and did not order her to make up for the prayers she had missed.” [Al-Udar bi Jahal of Shaykh Ahmad Fareed]

“Also when the messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) made hijrah to Medina the prayer was increased for the residents but those who were far from him, such as those in Mecca and Abyssinia, used to pray two rak`at and he did not order them to repeat their prayers.” [Al-Udar bi Jahal of Shaykh Ahmad Fareed]

Further evidence: “When Mu’aawiyah ibn Al-Hakam as-Sulamee (radiyallaahu anhu) spoke in prayer after the forbiddance, being ignorant of it. So he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said “this prayer of ours – nothing from the speech of humans”, and he did not order him to repeat the prayer.” [Majmoo Al Fataawa 22/41-42]

Imaam Al Qurtubee (rahimahullaah) said:

“So just as the kaafir does not become a believer except by choosing imaan over kufr, then likewise a believer does not become a kaafir through something by which he did not intend kufr nor choose it. There is ijmaa upon this.” [Tafseer Ul-Qurtabi 7/6128]

Ibn Al-Qayyim (rahimahullaah) said:

“..As for the kufr of ignorance when the proof has not been established and of one who has not been able to reach the truth, then Allaah has denied punishment for such a one until the proof brought by the messenger is established.”

Imaam Ash-Showkaani (rahimahullaah) said:

“..Whoever prostrates to other than Allaah out of ignorance, he does not become a disbeliever.” [Naylul Awtaar 6/210]

And there are many more statements from our salaf and the scholars of Ahla Sunnah wal Jammat establishing that proof has to be established upon a believer before pronouncing takfeer upon him. I refer the noble reader to the book Al-udhar-bil-jahal` by Shaykh Ahmad Fareed.

_____________________

1.That his kufr of action and saying is connected to his belief and heart.

That a Muslim is not pronounced a kaafir (disbeliever) except if he rejects something known from the religion by necessity, or if he denies it out of arrogance or pride, or if he opposes it whilst not believing in it.

This principle dictates the following:

A) One who does not judge by what Allaah has revealed out of rejection that it is an obligation, then such an individual is a disbeliever (kaafir) with major kufr.

B) One who does not adhere to judging by what Allaah has revealed out of arrogance or pride then such an individual is a disbeliever, with major kufr.

C) One who opposes judging by what Allaah has revealed whilst not believing in it, rejecting it as an obligation then such an individual is a disbeliever, with major kufr.

D) One who remains in doubt about the obligation of judging by what Allaah has revealed then such an individual is a disbeliever. [Doubt here can be of two types either in its obligation or in its interpretation. What is referred to here is doubt in its obligation.]

However if such an individual accepts the obligation to judge by what Allaah has revealed and believes that it is most supreme over any other law and system, but he left judging by it for some weakness or following of desires or sin or out of fear or hope then his original imaan does not disappear such an individual is not a disbeliever (kaafir), with major kufr. Rather he is a disbeliever with minor kufr and he is still within the fold of Islam.

This is just a brief explanation of what this principle dictates, a further and clearer
explanation can be found in chapter four.

EVIDENCE FOR PRINCIPLE FOUR

One of the best evidences in my view, in order to show you principle four in implementation is the following:

Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said:

“And this was the state of An-Najaashi, (ruler of Habashi). Even though he was the king of the Christians his people did not follow him in accepting Islam. Rather only a number of them accepted Islam with him, and for this, when he died there was no one to pray over him. So the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) prayed over him in Medina. He went out with the Muslims to the musalla and arranged them in rows and prayed over him and informed them of the death the day he died. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “Verily a righteous brother of yours from the people of Al-Habashi has died.”And many of the outwardly manifested pillars of Islam or most of them, he did not establish upon his people because of his weakness in that. So he did not do hijrah, nor did he fight jihaad, nor did he perform the hajj. It has even been narrated that he did not even establish his five daily prayers, and he did not fast in Ramadaan, neither did he pay the legislated Zakaat (all of these are obligatory actions), because that would have made apparent to his people and they would have disapproved of it opposing him, and it was not possible for him to differ with them. We know definitely that it was not possible for him to judge between his people with the Qur’aan even though Allaah had made it an obligation upon the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) in Medina, that if the people of the book came to him, then he should not judge between them except with what Allaah has revealed to him..” [Minhaaj as Sunnah 5/112-113]

From this statement of Shaykhul Islam Ibnu Taymiyyah we can clearly understand that An-Najaashi did not rule by what Allaah had revealed and that if one does not deny, reject, opposes or makes halaal what Allaah made haraam or vice versa, with belief that it is an obligation to judge by what Allaah has revealed then such an individual is a believer even if he does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, out of weakness, fear, hope, etc. This is because the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “…your brother in Habashi has died..” then he prayed over him, which he would not say or do if An-Najashi was a kaafir.

We also find in Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree, a narration about Haatib ibn Baltah, where he informed the Quraish to be aware that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) was going to attack Mecca. When Allaah gave this information to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) he summoned Haatib, and ‘Umar (radiyallaahu anhumaa).

Umar said:

“Let me take off the head of this munafiq, O Messenger of Allaah.”

The messenger refused and asked him (Haatib):

“Why did you do this?”

He replied:

“O Messenger of Allaah, Verily I did not do this out of disbelief (Kufr) I believe Allaah is going to aid you. All the companions here have relatives to take care of their families in Mecca but I do not. So I thought by giving them this information they will be lenient towards my family there.”

So the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Leave him for perhaps Allaah has turned to the people who partook in al Badr and said do what you will, I have forgiven you.”
[Al-Bukhaaree]

So ‘Umar (radiyallaahu anhu) believed this action to be hypocrisy, but the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) asked Haatib “Why did you do this?” He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) established the proof on him first, and then let him be after concluding it was of the lesser kufr and not the major kufr.

Further evidence is in the saying of Imaam At-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah):

“And the slave is not taken out of the fold of imaan except by denying that which entered him into it.” [Aqeedatut-Taahawiyyah p-331]

The Shaykh is pointing out a refutation to the Khawaarij and Mu’tazilah, where they say a person leaves imaan by doing major sins [other than shirk]. And this clearly shows that a mere action alone cannot take one out of the fold of Islam until the proof is established that this action displayed is what the belief of the person is. Just as when one becomes a Muslim the action of the shahadah alone is not acceptable until it is clear the person understands and believes what he is entering into.